Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Sections
Personal tools
You are here: Home Models 1% funding

1% Budget or top slicing

This model more closely resembles the type of PB developed in Brazil, where a percentage of the overall budget for an area is identified for PB. In Porto Alegre, this percentage rose to as much as 18%.

Acorns March 2009

When considering using PB with larger budgets, its important to consider that PB has never been about an entire budget nor has it included budgets for statutory provision.  PB is about involving people in allocating a proportion of a discretionary budget. 

Whilst it's admirable that in Porto Alegre they allocate up to 18% using PB, the PB Unit felt that 1% was a more manageable place to start, particularly in a difficult economic climate.  And that would be 1% of the discretionary spend.  Even at that small percentage, it's still a significant amount of money to citizens, and can have dramatic impacts on service provision, neighbourhoods and wellbeing.

In Porto Alegre, once the budget amount was decided upon, this was then allocated to neighbourhoods according to a budget matrix which took into account the priorities for the neighbourhood, the population and the level of social deprivation.  The criteria for the matrix were agreed each year and publicised to ensure fairness and transparency.

“This scheme offers communities an unprecedented level of involvement in shaping their
future facilities”.
Councillor Jill Elson, East Devon District Council

However, an alternative model might be to equally split the pot of money between the neighbourhoods regardless of population or other factors.  Or, rather than allocating the money at the neighbourhood level, it can be allocated across the entire area - perhaps for larger scale projects which would impact beyond a single neighbourhood. 

The benefits of such a model is that citizens can directly influence public service budgets and become more involved in commissioning and the budget cycle.  There are greater opportunities to really understand budgets and to shape what and how services are provided in their neighbourhood.  This model is considered more radical than community grants and doesn't suffer from being labelled 'tokenistic'.  However, more resources and checks and balances need to be put in place, the process needs to be robust and capacity is needed to develop the community to meaningfully engage, so it's not a process that is undertaken lightly. 

We have produced a policy briefing on the budget matrix which can be found below, as well as some case studies of areas that have adopted this approach - or combined this approach with others.

Document Actions
Copyright 2007, by the Contributing Authors. Cite/attribute Resource. Ruth. (2011, August 18). 1% Budget or top slicing. Retrieved February 22, 2012, from Participatory Budgeting Unit Web site: http://www.participatorybudgeting.org.uk/models/1-funding/1-budget-or-top-slicing. All Rights Reserved.